document resume ed 235 859 jc 830 481 · document resume ed 235 859 jc 830 481 author morris, cathy...

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 235 859 JC 830 481

AUTHOR Morris, CathyTITLE Equal Access/Equal Opportunity Research at Miami-Dade

Community College, Fall 1976-77 through Fall 1981-82Cohorts. Research. Report No. 83-09.

INSTITUTION Miami-Dade Community Coll., Fla. Office ofInstitutional Research>

PUB DATE Apr 83NOTE 78p.PUB TYPE Reports - Research/Technical (143) Statistical

Data (110)

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

MF01/PC04 Plus Postage.*Academic Persistence; Age; Black Students; CohortAnalysis; *College Graduates; Community Colleges;*Enrollment Trends; Females; Graduation; HispanicAmericans; Longitudinal Studies; Males; *StudentCharacteristics; Two Year Colleges; *Two Year CollegeStudents; White Students

ABSTRACTDrawing from Miami-Dade Community College's computer

file containing over 60,000 student records, this report presentsdata on six student cohort groups entering the college asfirst-time-in-college, full-time students between fall 1976 and fall1981. For the college as a whole, and for each of its four campuses,longitudinal data are provided on student ethnic background, gender,and age, and re-enrollment and graduation rates. Selected findingsinclude the following: (1) each of the student cohorts contains over5,000 full-time students, representing approximately 50% of the totalfirst-time-in-college students; (2) the male to female proportionshave shifted over the 6-year period, so that slightly more than halfof the students in each cohort are females; (3) the ethnicproportions have also shifted across the years, with an increase inthe proportion of Hispanic students evident; (4) for both Blacks andHispanics, the proportion of students over 26 years of age hasgradually increased; (5) in general, after 3 years, 25% of thestudents remain enrolled and 25%.have graduated; and (6) theimplementation of standards of academic progress in 1978 had aninitial effect of depressing re-enrollment and graduation rates amongall ethnic groups, though a recovery in these rates was evident inlater cohorts among White and Black students. The report concludeswith questions for further research. (HB)

***********************************************************************.* Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made ** from the original document. ************************************************************************

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER IERICI

This docur ient has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it.

.V Minor changes have been made to improvereproduction quality.

Points of view or opinions stated in this docu.ment do not necessarily represent official NIEposition Or policy.

C1,1 EQUAL ACCESS/EQUAL OPPORTUNITY RESEARCHAT MIAMI-DADE COMMUNITY COLLEGE

FALL 1976-77 THROUGH FALL 1981-82 COHORTS

Research Report No. 83-09

April 1983

Cathy MorrisAssociate Director

Figures for Tables Prepared byHanna Leone

Staff Associate

OFFICE OF INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH

John Losak, Dean.

2

"PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THISMATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (OC)."

Table of Contents

Page

List of Tables

List of Figures iii

Introduction1

Procedures 2

Results and Discussion 2

Demographic Characteristics of the Cohorts 2

Re-enrollment and Graduation Rates 10

Summary 42

Questions for Further Research 48

List of Tables

TABLES

.1-5

1

2

3

4

Summary of Demographic Characteristics of Full-Time-First-Time Cohorts - Fall 1976 Thru Fall 1981College-WideNorth CampusSaith CampusNew World Center Campus

Page

4-84-8

4

5

6

75 Medical Center Campus

6 Summary of Demographic Characteristics of Full-Time First-Time Cohorts Fall 1976 Thru Fall 1981. . . . .. . ... 9

7-11 Enrollment and Cumulative Graduation Rate per 100 Full-Timefirst-time-in-College Students - Closing Fall Terms

14-18

COLLEGE-WIDE 14-187 Total All Ethnic 143 White Non-Hispanic 159 Black Non-Hispanic 16

10 Hispanic 1711 Other Ethnic , ..... 18

12-16 Enrollment and Cumulative Graduation Rate per 100 Full-TimeFirst-time-in-College Students - Closing Fall TermsNORTH CAMPUS 23-27

12 Tot All Ethnic 2313 White Non-Hispanic 2414 Black Non-Hispanic 2515 Hispanic 2616 Other Ethnic . 27

17-21 Enrollment and Cumulative Graduation Rate per 100 Full TimeFirst-time-in-College Students - Closing Fall TermsSOUTH CAMPUS 28 -32

17 Total All Ethnic 2815 White Non-Hispanic 2919 Black Non-Hispanic 3020 Hispanic 3121 Other Ethnic 32

22-26 Enrollment and Cumulative Graduation Rate per 100 Full-TimeFirst-time-in-College Students - Closing Fall TermsNEW WORLD CENTER CAMPUS 33-37

22 Total All Ethnic 3323 White Win-Hispanic 3424 Black Non-Hispanic 3525 Hispanic 3626 Other Ethnic 37

List of Tables(continued)

TABLESPa_ge

27-30 Enrollment and Cumulative Graduation Rate per 100 Full-TimeFirst-time-in-College Students - Closing Fall TermsMEDICAL CENTER CAMPUS 38-41

27 Total All Ethnic 3828 White Non-Hispanic 3929 Black Non - Hispanic 4030 Hispanic

41

List of Figures

FIGURES

1 Three-Year Re-enrollment Rates by Ethnic and by Campus. R 45

2 Three-Year Graduation Rates by Ethnic and by Campus . . 46

3 Three-Year Graduation + Re-enrollment Rate by Ethnicand by Campus

47

Equal Access/Equal Opportunity Researchat Miami-Dade Community College

Fall 1976-77 Through Fall 1981-82 Cohorts

Introduction

Miami-Dade Community College is committed to providing equal access

and equal opportunity for all students. Monitoring the progress of students

as they enter, matriculate, and eventually graduate from the college is one

important aspect of this commitment. Beginning in November of 1978, three

cohort analyses were conducted (Research Report 78-99, 80-27, 80-79) which

presented longitudinal data on enrollment, graduation rates, and grade point

averages of first-time-in-college students by ethnic category. This series

of cohort studies represented an important segment of research related to

Equal Access and Equal Opportunity (EA/EO), as outlined in the 1974 document

"Report of the Florida Public Community College Equal Access/Equal Opportunity

Consulting Team."

In the Fall Term 1982-83, it was decided to establish a comprehensive

longitudinal data base for the College in order to continue and extend the

cohort analyses. A computer file containing over 60,000 student records was

established.1

Data for this longitudinal file were collected at the end of

term (Closing) as opposed to the original Cohort studies which used Opening

term data. The new data base allows tracking of re- enrollment and graduation

on a term-by-term basis ;or six complete years. The present report is both

a repl :cation and extension of the original cohort analyses.

1

Mr. Curt Kammer developed this file for ongoing longitudinal research.

Procedures

All first-time-in-college students (J's) were identified for each

Fall Teci beginning from 1976 onward, and formed the population from which

the cohorts were selected. The first-time-in-college students were categorized

as full-time or part-time on the basis of credits registered during their

first term. The final group of cohorts consisted of full-time students only

for 1976 through 1981, since full.-time students are much more likely to be

enrolled for the purpose of obtaining a degree. Re-enrollment rate was ex-

amined for each succeeding rejor term. Additionally, graduation records were

searched to identify any of the full-time-first-time students who had graduated.

Results and Discussion

Demographic Characteristics of the Cohorts Tables 1 through 6

present data on the demographic composition of each cohort. In Table 1

college-wide data are presented on the number and percent of each ethnic

category by gender. The column on the far right of the table gives the per-

centage that these full-time first-time students are of the total-first-time

(J) students.

It can be seen from the table that each of the cohorts contains

more than 5,000 students. These full-time students represent approximately

one-half of the total first-time-in-college students. The male to female

proportions have shifted over the years so that slightly more than one-half

of the students in each cohort are females. The ethnic proportions have

also shifted across the years with an increase in the proportion of Hispanics

evident. For the 1976 cohort, 32.8% were Hispanic, while for the 1981 cohort,

58.6% were Hispanic. The decrease in the proportion of black non-Hispanics

-2

across cohorts is partially accounted for by the fact that we are examining

full-time J's only. Note that in 1976, the full-time black non-Hispanic

students were 57.5% of the total black J students. By 1981, however, the

full-time black non-Hispanics were only 41.8% of the total black J students.

Table 2 presents data for the North Campus. Note that the Hispanic

proportion has increased from 1976 to 1981 (from 27.9% to 51.8%). This same

shift toward a higher proportion bf Hispanics is also evident in the South

Campus data (Table 3). In Table 4, note that by the Fall of 1981, slightly

over three-fourths of the New World Center Campus full-time J's were Hispanic.

Finally, the Medical Center Campus shows a gradual shift towards an almost

tri-ethnic mix in the full-time J students.

In summary, this selection of full-time first-time students across

the six Fall Terms generally mirrors trends noted in other enrollment reports.

North Campus, South Campus, and New World Center Campus have shifted to more

than 50% Hispanic students by the Fall of 1981, while the Medical Center

Campus remains more tri-ethnic. Females constitute slightly more than half

of the full-time first-time students for the past five years, and each of the

full-time cohorts represents approximately one-half of the total J students

enrolled for the respective Fall Terms.

Table 6 presents the final! demographic summary which is an examina-

tion of age ranges. Note that for both black non-Hispanics and Hispanics, the

proportion of older students (26+ years old) has gradually increased. This

has been accompanied by a decrease in students in the 19-20 year old category.

Thus for black non-Hispanics and Hispanics, the last four full-time first-time

cohorts represent a slight shift toward an older age group.

3

lacie 1

Summary of Demographic Characteristics of Full-Time First-Time CohortsFall 1976 Thru Fall 1981

College-Wide

Ethnic Category

Gender

Total

Percentof

College

Percent ofFirst-TimStudents

(J)

Male Female

Number

Percentof

Ethnic

Percentof

Number Ethnic

Fall 1976

White Non-Hispanic 1,213 54.3 1,023 45.7 2,236 42.7 51.3Black Non-Hispanic 488 42.0 676 58.0 1,164 22.2 57.5Hispanic 880 51.3 835 48.7 1,715 32.8 53.2Other 80 65.6 42 34.4 122 2.3 35.0Total 2,661 50.8 2,576 49.2 5,237 100.0 52.6

Fall 1977

White Non-Hispanic 1,139 54.4 954 45.6 2,093 38.3 50.3Black Non-Hispanic 446 34.5 847 65.5 1,293 23.7 55.9Hispanic 931 47.0 1,052 53.0 1,983 36.3 51.1Other 60 65.0 32 35.0 92 1.7 57.1Total 2,576 47.2 2,885 52.8 5,461 100.0 51.9

Fall 1978

White Non-Hispanic 1,054 52.9 938 47.1 1,992 37.6 49.5Black Non-Hispanic 349 33.6 688 66.4 1,037 19.5 57.6Hispanic 996 46.4 1,150 53.6 2,146 40.5 53.4Other 73 56.2 57 43.8 130 2.4 62.8Total 2,472 46.6 2,833 53.4 5,305 100.0 52.8

Fall 1979

White Non-Hispanic 907 48.8 953 51.2 1,860 35.8 45.9Black Non-Hispanic 352 40.4 519 59.6 871 16.7 47.6Hispanic 1,073 45.2 1,301 54.8 2,374 45.6 54.2Other 56 56.0 , 44 44.0 100 1.9 55.2Total 2,388 45.9 2,817 54.1 5,205 100.0 49.8

Fall 1980

White Non-Hispanic 755 50.5 739 49.5 1,494 26.1 46.6Black Non-Hispanic 310 36.2 546 63.8 856 - 15.0 39.3Hispanic 1,611 49.3 1,655 50.7 3,266 57.1 55.9Other 56 54.4 47 45.6 103 1.8 63.6Total 2,732 47.8 2,987 52.2 5,719 100.0 50.2

Fall 1981

White Non-Hispanic 660 50.6 645 49.4 1,305 26.1 48.7Black Non-Hispanic 289 42.4 392 57.6 681 13.6 41.8iispanic 1,318 44.9 1,616 55.1 2,934 58.6 60.2)ther 56 65.1 30 34.9 86 1.7 61.4Total 2,323 46.4 2,683 53.6 5,006 100.0 53.7

)ata Source: Longitudinal Master File, SAS Analysis.

-4-

Table 2


North Campus

Gender

Ethnic Category Male Female Total Percent of Campus

Fall 1976

White Non-Hispanic 553 395 948 42.6Black Non-Hispanic 258 400 618 27.7Hispanic 335 286 621 27.9Other 23 17 40 1.8

Total 1,169 1,098 2,227 100.0

Fall 1977


Total 1,062 1,165 2,227 100.0

Fall 1978


Total 988 1,035 2,023 1,00.0

Fall 1979


Total 922 1,004 1,926 100.0

Fall 1980


Total 853 1,012 1,865 100.0

Fall 1981

White Non-Hispanic 195 171 366 22.1

Black Non-Hispanic 178 227 405 24.4

Hispanic 387 471 858 51.8

Other 19 10 29 1.7

Total. 779 879 1,658 100.0

Data Source: Longitudinal Master File, SAS Analysis.

- 5-

Table 3

Summary of Demographic Characteristics of Full-Time First-Time CohortsFall 1976 Thru Fall 1981'

South Campus

Gender


Fall 1976

White Non-Hispanic 541 540 1,081 53.6Black Non-Hispanic 84 114 198 9.8Hispanic 342 336 678 33.6Other 43 17 60 3.0

Total 1,010 1,007 2,017 100.0

Fall 1977


Total 1,039 1,054 2,093 100.0

Fall 1978


Total 1,076 1,145 2,221 100.0

Fall 1979

White Non-Hispanic 480 558 1,038 45.9Black Non-Hispanic 65 72 137 6.1Hispanic 456 579 1,035 45.7Other 30 23 53 2.3

'total 1,031 1,232 2,263 100.0

Fall 1980

White Non-Hispanic 431 455 886 37.7Black Non-Hispanic 46 90 136 5.8Hispanic 575 696 1,271 54.0Other 28 32 60 2.5

Total 1,080 1,273 2,353 100.0

Fall 1981


Total 1,106 1,257 2,363 100.0


11

Table 4


New World Center Campus

Gender


Fall 1976


Total 445 415 860 100.0

Fall 1977


Total 450 618 1,068 100.0

Fall 1978

White Non-Hispanic 82 92 174 16.9Black Non-Hispanic 85 220 305 29.7Hispanic 224 311 535 52.1Other 10 3 13 , 1.3

Total 401 626 1,027 100.0

Fall 1979


Total 416 509 925 100.0

Fail 1980


Total 765 605 1,370 100.0

Fall 1981


Total 393 469 862 100.0


Table 5


Medical Center Campus

Gender


Fall 1976

White Non-Hispanic 17 43 60 45.1Black Non-Hispanic 7 31 38 28.6Hispanic 13 22 35 26.3Other

Total 37 96 133 100.0

Fall 1977

White Non-Hispanic 11 18 29 39.7Black Non-Hispanic 8 15 23 31.5Hispanic 6 15 21 28.8Other -

Total 25 48 73 100.0

Fall 1978

White Non-Hispanic 14 14 41.2Black Non-Hispanic 2 5 7 20.6Hispanic 5 8 13 38.2Other - -

Total 7 27 34 100.0

Fall 1979

White Non-Hispanic 4 28 32 35.1Black Non - Hispanic. 6 21 27 29.7Hispanic 9 21 30 33.0Other 2 2 2.2

Total 19 72 91 100.0

Fall 1980

White Non-Hispanic 13 26 39 29.8Black Non-Hispanic 5 35 40 30.5Hispanic 16 36 52 39.7Other - -

Total 34 97 131 100.0

Fall 1981

White Non-Hispanic 18 14 32 26.0Black Non-Hispanic 8 34 42 34.2Hispanic 19 29 48 39.0Other - 1 1 0.8

Total 45 78 123 100.0


- 8 - 13

Table 6


Age Categories

Unknown 14-18 19 - 20 21 - 25 26 Ethnic Totals

Percentof

Ethnic Category Number Ethnic Number

Percentof

Ethnic

Percentof

Number Ethnic Number

Percentof

Ethnic Number

Percentof

Ethnic Number

Percentof

College

Fall 1976

White Non-Hispanic 0 1,610 72.0 308 13.8 169 7.5 149 6.7 2,236 100.0Black Non-Hispanic 1 0.1 573 49.2 233 20.0 225 19.3 132 11.3 1,164 100.0Hispanic1 0.1 1,084 63.2 362 21.1 134 7.8 134 7.8 1,715 100.0Other Ethnic 0 49 40.2 26 21.3 30 24.6 17 13.9 122 100.0Total 2 - 3,316 63.3 929 17.7 558 10.7 432 8.3 5,237 100.0

Fall 1977

White Non-Hisparic 0 1,546 73.9 263 12.6 164 7.8 120 5.7 2,093 100.0Black Non-Hispanic 0 - 581 44.9 235 18.2 237. 18.3 240 18.6 1,293 100.0Hispanic 2 0.1 1,230 62.0 375 18.9 -138' 7.0 238 12.0 1,983 100.0Other Ethnic 0 30 32.6 21 22.8 -25 27.2 16 17.4 92 100.0Total 2 - 3,387 62.0 894 16.4 564 10.3 614 11.3 5,461 100.0

Fall 1978

White Non-Hispanic 5 0.3 1,400 70.3 281 14.1 162 8.1 144 7.2 1,992 100.0Black Non-Hispanic 2 0.2 581 56.0 172 16.6 142 13.7 140 13.5 1,037 100.0Hispanic 15 0.7 1,438 67.0 354 16.5 118 5.5 221 10.3 2,146 100.0Other Ethnic 0 - 61 46.9 25 19.2 29 22.3 15 11.6 130 100.0Total 22 0.4 3,480 65.6 832 15.7 451 8.5 520 9.8 5,305 100.0

Fall 1979

White Non-Hispanic 4 0.2 1,421 76.4 219 11.8 122 6.6 94 5.0 1,860 100.0Black Non-Hispanic 1 0.1 483 55.4 147 16.9 140 16.1 100 11.5 871 100.0Hispanic 8 0.3 1,569 66.1 379 16.0 144 6.1 274 11.5 2,374 100.0Other Ethnic 0 60 60.0 23 23.0 11 11.0 6 6.0 100 100.0Total 13 0.2 3,533 67.9 768 14.8 417 8.0 474 9.1 5,205 100.0

Fall 1980

White Non-Hispanic 2 0.1 1,134 75.9 179 12.0 87 5.8 92 6.2 1,494 100.0Black Non-Hispanic 0 496 57.9 122 14.3 118 13.8 120 14.0 856 100.0Hispanic 0 1,906 58.4 531 16.2 311 9.5 518 15.9 3,266 100.0Other Ethnic 0 58 56.3 23 22.3 15 14.6 7 6.8 103 100.0Total 2 3,594 62.8 855 15.0 531 9.3 737 12.9 5,719 100.0

Fall 1981

White Non-Hispanic 0 1,000 76.6 168 12.9 68 5.2 69 5.3 1,305 100.0Black Non-Hispanic 0 356 52.3 106 15.6 109 16.0 110 16.1 681 100.0Hispanic 1 1,707 58.2 491 16.7 248 8.5 487 16.6 2,934 100.0Other Ethnic 0 - 47 54.7 17 19.8 15 17.47 8.1 86 100.0Total 1 - 3,110 62.1 782 15.6 440 8.8 673 13.5 5,006 100.0


14

Re-enrollment and Graduation Rates, Tables 7-11 present data on en-

rollment and cumulative graduation rates for the six cohorts. The cohort years

are given across the Table (for example, for the Closing Fall 1976-77,,the

cohort is abbreviated 76-1), and the number of students in each cohort is given

in parenthesis immediately below. The data in the body of the tables are pre-

sented in terms of a typical 100 full-time first-time-in-college students for

each cohort. Put another way, these data are the percent of the original number

of students that either re-enrolled or graduated. In the left-hand column of

the table are the progressive major terms. The term labelTed Fall 1 is the

beginning Fall Term of each cohort. Thus for the 79-1 cohort, Fall 1 represents

the Fall Term of 1979-80. A dashed line is drawn across the Table after Winter

3. This point represents. three full years for each cohort. With the data

arrayed in this manner, it is possible to simply look across the table for

any Fall or Winter Term and find comparable data for each cohort.

Table 7 presents data for the ethnic categories combined. The 76-1

cohort has six full years of data and shows a 36% graduation rate, with 5% of

the students still enrolled. In general, after three full years, one-fourth of

the students remain enrolled and approximately one-fourth have graduated.

The Standards of Academic Progress were begun in the Fall Term of

1978. For students already enrolled, the Standards did not take effect until

the following academic year. For the 76-1 cohort, the impact began during

Fall 4, and for the 77-1 cohort, during Fall 3. Effects of the SOAP inter-

vention are not obvious from the collapsed ethnic data of Table 7. These

effects are evident, however, in the separate ethnic analyses which follow.

110

Data for white non-Hispanic students are presented In Table 8. Note

that for the 78-1 cohort, both the re-enrollment and graduation rates have de-

clined when compared to the two earlier cohorts. The 78-1 group was the first

group entirely under the Standards. Prior to this intervention, approximately

20% of the students were still enrolled after 3 years, while 30% had graduated.

For the 78-1 cohort, however, the graduation rate has decreased to 24% after

three years. Presumably the more.stringent requirements led to a considerable

drop in the three-year graduation rate. Data for the 79-1 and 80-1 cohorts

are most encouraging. Note that the three-year graduation rate has returned

to almost 30% for the 79-1 cohort. The graduation rate for Fall 4 is the highest

of any cohort at that point. For the 80-1 cohort, the Fall 3 re-enrollment

rate (30%) is also th, ghest of any cohort, and the graduation rate of 24%

is comparable to earlier data. Finally, with the limited data available on

the 81-1 cohort, the Fall 2 re-enrollment rate (63%) is the highest Fall 2

rate of any of the cohorts. In summary, data for white non-Hispanics indicate

that the interventions begun in 78-1 had an initial effect of depressing re-

enrollment and graduation rates, but these rates have fully recovered and have,

in fact, improved with the later cohorts.

Table 9 presents data for black non-Hispanic students. Note the de-

cline in the number of blacks in the later cohorts due in part to the shift of

more black non-Hispanic students to a part-time status. The six-year graduation

rate for black non-Hispanics from the 76-1 cohort is 23% with 5% of the students

still enrolled. This graduation rate is considerably less than was noted for

white non-Hispanics (36%). The impact of the SOAP interventions can be seen

most strikingly on this table. Note the high re-enrollment and graduation

16

rates for-the 76-1 cohort through Winter 3. The 76-1 students first came

under the Standards in Fall 4. At that point the re-enrollment rate drops

to 11% which is comparable to the Fall 4 rate for the other cohorts. Since

the graduation rate is cumulative, it remains relatively high. The 77-1

cohort was firt impacted by the Standards during Fall 3. Here, the effect

on both re-enrollment and graduation rate can be seen in contrast to the 76-1

cohort. By Winter 3, 11% of the 77-1 group had graduated while 16% of the

earlier 76-1 group had graduated. The re-enrollment rate for the 77-1 group

was reduced to 17%. The 78-1 cohort was under the Standards during its entire

enrollment. Notice that by Fall 3, there is already an improvement in re-

enrollment rates which continues through Winter 3. Graduation rates, however,

are very similar to the 77-1 cohort data. For the 79-1 cohort, a remarkable

improvement is evident. The three-year graduation rate (Winter 3) is now 20%

which is the highest three-year rate on the Table. The re-enrollment rate for

Winter 3 is comparable to the 76-1 cohort figure for students who were not

under the Standards. The Fall 4 graduation rate. of 24% is the highest gradua-

tion rate on the entire Table. Thus after three years and one term, the 79-1

cohort has a higher graduation rate than the 76-1 cohort showed after six full

years. The graduation rate for the 80-1 cohort at Fall 3 has once again de-

clined. This reflects the beginnings of Basic Skills Assessment and enforce-

ment of policies requiring students to take developmental coursework. We

would thus expect that students would take longer to graduate from 80-1 on-

ward. Note, however, that the retention rate has remained high and that the

Winter 2 and Fall 3 re-enrollment rates are the highest since the 76-1 cohort.

Data for the 81-1 cohort indicate that the high retention rates are being

maintained. In summary, data for black non-Hispanics show the same drop in

retention and graduation rates as was true for white non-Hispanics. A re-

covery is noted for the later cohorts, however, indicating that the inter-

vention strategies are proving successful.

Table 10 presents data for Hispanic students. Note the increase

in the number of Hispanics in each cohort as the years progress. The six-

year graduation rate for Hispanics (46%) from the 76-1 cohort is the highest

of any ethnic group. Close to one-half of the Hispanic students had graduated

after six years with 6%Istill enrolled. The !impact of the Standards of

Academic Progress can be seen for Hispanic students also. For the 77-1

cohort, the interventions were in place for Fall 3 and Winter 3. Note

the reduction in both re-enrollment and graduation rates for these two

terms when compared to the 76-1 cohort. The three-year (Winter 3) gradua-

tion rate has recovered for the 78-1 cohort and stabilized for the 79-1

cohort. The re-enrollment rate, however, remains at just over 30%. In

summary, Hispanic students show decreased enrollment and graduation rates

for 77-1 and theh a slight recovery in graduation rate which stabilizes

for the remaining cohorts.

Table 11 presents collapsed data on the remaining ethnic

categories. Because of the small numbers of students involved, these

data are quite erratic and the table is left to the reader to examine.

Table 7

College-Wide.

Enrollment and Cumulative Graduation Rate per 100 Full-Time First-time-in-CollegeStudents

Closing Fall Terms

Total All Ethnic

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1 80-1 81-1Consecutive (11= 5,237) (N= 5,461) (N= 5,305) (N= 5,205)(N=F)7l9 ) (N=5,006 )Major

Terms Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad

Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 83 83 80 81 82 83

Fall 2 63 2 59 2 60 2 60 2 61 .63 1

1

Winter 259 8 53 52 6 54 6 55 4

Fall 3 33 22 30 19 30 19 33 21 34 19

Winter 3 26 26 23 23 24 24 26 27

Fall 4 13 31 13 28 13' 29 15 32

Winter 411 33 11 29 12 31

Fall 57 34 7 31 9 32

Winter 56 35 7 32

Fall 65 35 6 33

Winter 6 5 36


Table 8

College -Wide


Closing Fall Terms

White Non-Hispanic

76-1 77-1 78-1 79.1 80-1 81-1Consecutive (N= 2,236) (N= 2,093) (N= 1,992) (N= 1,860) (N= 1,494) (N= 1,305)Major


Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 82 82 78 80 80 82

Fall 2 59 2 60 2 56 2 57 1 58 1 63 1

Winter 2 53 9 52 7 49 7 51 6 51 7

Fall 3 26 25 27 24 25 20 28 24 30 24

Winter 3 19 30 19 30 18 24 19 29

Fall 4 11 32 11 32 10 29 11 33

Winter 4 8 33 9 34 9 30

Fall 5 6 34 6 35 7 31

Winter 5 5 35 4 36

Fall 6 3 36 4 37

Winter 6 3 36


Table 9

College-Wide

Enrollment and Cumulative Graduation Rate per 100 Full-TimeFirst-time-in-College Students

Closing Fall Terms

Black Non-Hispanic

76-1 77.1 78-1. 79-1 80-1

. 81-1Consecutive (N= 1,164) (N= 1,293) (N= 1,037) (N= 871) (N: 856 )(N.= 681 )

Major


Fall 1 100

Winter 1 79

Fall 2 56 1

Winter 2 55 3

sci)

Fall 3 30 12

Winter 3 24 16

100 100 100 100

77 73 7881

46 1 46 1 5455 54

42 3 39 3 48 3 50 2

23. 10 25 10 27 15 30 11

17 11 19 12 24 20

100

79

Fall 4 11 20 10 15 9 16 11 24

Winter 4 11 21 9 16 9 17

Fall 5 7 22 6 17 6 18

Winter 5 6 22 6 17

Fall 6 5 23 4 18

Winter 6 5 23

Data Source: longitudinal Master File, SAS Analysis.

Table 10

College-Wide


Closing Fall Terms

Hispanic

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1 80-1 81-1Consecutive (N= 1,715) (N= 1,983) (N= 2,146) (N= 2,374) (N= 3,266) (N: 2,934)

Major


Fall 1

Winter 1

Fall 2

Winter 2

Fall 3

Winter 3

100 100 100 100 100 100

87 86 86 83 83 85

76 3 66 2 70 4 64 3 63 65 1

70 9 62 6 62 8 57 6 57 4

45 26 38 20 37 23 39 21 37 19

36 33 32 25 31 28 32 28

Fall 4 19 39 18 31 18 35 19 34

Winter 4 16 41 15 32 15 36

Fall 5 10 43 10 35 11 39

Winter 5 8 44 9 36

Fall 6 8 45 9 38

Winter 6 6 46


Table 11

College-Wide

Enrollment and CumulativeGraduation Rate per 100 Full-Time

First-time-in-College StudentsClosing Fall Terms

Other Ethnic

76-1 77-1 78-1Consecutive (N= 122 ) (N=, 92) (N= 130 )

Major


79-1

(Nr. 100 )

80-1

(N= 103 )

81-1

(N: 86 )

Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100 .

Winter 1 70 84 78 84 87 74

Fall 2 36 4 72 3 63 2 67 4 76 1 59 2

Winter 2 32 7 55 9 57 5 60 5 69 7

Fall 3 20 14 27 27 34 22 39 32 45 36

Winter 3 15 14 21 29 30 28 27 38

Fall 4 7 21 11 33 16 36 9 41

Winter 4 4 21 10 34 17 39

Fall 5 0 21 4 37 5 40

Winter 5 0 21 3 37

Fall 6 0 22 7 38

Winter 6 2 22

.

Data Source:Longitudinal Master File, SAS Analysis.

o:

)

2*I

Tables 12 through 16 present enrollment and cumulative graduation

rates for the North Campus. The six-year graduation rate for the 76-1 cohort

was 36% with 4% of the students still enrolled. Examining the three-year

point (Winter 3) for each cohort once again illustrates the effect of the

interventions. For the 76-1 cohort, the interventions were not in place by

Winter 3. The decrease in graduation rate for the next two cohorts at Winter

3 is a reflection of the SOAP intervention. The 79-1 cohort shows the same

recovery noted in the previous data with a 28% graduation rate at Winter 3,

the highest of any cohort at this point. Additionally, the re-enrollment

rate is also the highest of any cohort. The Fall 4 graduation rate (34%)

is almost comparable to the six-year figure (36%) of the 76-1 cohort. The

80-1 cohort reflects the impact of basic skills testing. Graduation rate

at Fall 3 has decreased slightly, but retention rate (38%) is the highest

at this point of any cohort.

Table 13 presents data for white non-Hispanics. The same pattern

of decreased graduation rates during the initia, SOAP intervention can be

seen for the 77-1 and 78-1 cohorts. The 79-1 cohort shows a recovery in

graduation rate with a three-year rate of 31%. Data for black non-Hispanics

(Table 14) indicate once again that the graduation rates are lower than for

other ethnic categories. The improvement due to the SOAP interventions can

be seen most clearly at the three-year point (Winter 3). For the 79-1 cohort

the graduation rate for Winter 3 is 21% which is the highest Winter 3 point on

the table. Re-enrollment rates also show a slight recovery from the 78-1

cohort onward. The impact of the basic skills testing for the 80-1 cohort

- 19 -

onward can be seen in the decrease in graduation rates at Fall 3 indicating

that students are taking longer to complete their degrees. Data for Hispanic

students (Table 15) show very similar patterns. As was true college-wide,

Hispanics have the highest graduation rate of the major ethnic groups. Ex-

amining the three -year rates, a decline can be seen for the 77-1 cohort

with a recovery for subsequent cohorts. Data on the "Other" ethnic category

(Table 16) is left for the reader. to examine.

Data for the South Campus are presented in Tables 17 through 21.

For the campus as a whole, the impact of the interventions is less evident.

Note that the three-year re-enrollment rates (Winter 3) remain fairly con-

stant across cohorts. The Winter 3 graduation rate shows a slight decline

for the 78-1 cohort and a recovery for the 79-1 cohort. Perhaps the most

noticeable effect of the intervention is the improved retention figures for

the Fa11,2 and Winter 2 in the later cohorts. The Fall 2 retention rate for

the 81-1 cohort is 71%, which is the highest Fall 2 rate on the Table.

Data for white nsnHispanics (Table 18) are very similar to campus-

wide data. Data for black non-Hispanics (Table 19) more directly illustrate

the impact of the Standards. The retention and graduation rates for the 77-1

cohort during Fall 3 and Winter 3 have declined remarkably when compared to

the 76-1 cohort. Fall 3 and Winter 3 were the first terms during which the

77-1 cohort came under the Standards. Note the gradual improvement in both

retention and graduation rates for the next two cohorts. For the final two

cohorts the Fall 3 graduation' rate (21%) is higher than the entire six-year

graduation rate for the 76-1 group (20%). The Fall 2 re-enrollment rate for

30-20-

the 81-1 cohort has reached an all time high of 69% Hispanic students

(Table 20) show a slight decrease in graduation rate at the three-year point

(Winter 3) across cohorts. For the 80-1 cohort, however, the Fall 3 gradua-

tion rate has reached 28%. (This in spite of the fact that there were no

graduates for Fall 2.) These data probably reflect the delay in graduation

due to basic skills testing and developmental coursework. Data for the

"Other" ethnic category (Table 21).are left for the reader to examine.

Data for the New World Center Campus are presented in Tables22

through 26. For the campus as a whole (Table 22) the impact of the Standards

can be seen in the collapsed ethnic data. Note the drop in both enrollment

and graduation rates at Winter 3 for the 77-1 cohort and the recovery shown

by the 78-1 and 79-1 cohorts. The impact of basic skills testing is reflected

by the 80-1 cohort where the Fail 3 graduation rate has dropped to 8%. The

re-enrollment rate for this cohort at Fall 3 has also decreased slightly.

Data for white non-Hispanics (Table 23) show some interesting

patterns. Their Winter 3 re-enrollment rates reached an all time low for

the 77-1 cohort. This cohort was under the Standards for both Fall 3 and

Winter 3. The re-enrollment rates recover for the next two cohorts, but

the graduation rates decline. For the 80-1 cohort the graduation rate has

improved. By Fall 3 the rate is 24%. Data for black non-Hispanics (Table 24)

show the typical patterns noted in previou data. There is a decline in both

re- enrollment and graduation rates for the 77-1 and 78-1 cohorts with a good

recovery for the 79-1 cohort. The Fall 4 graduation rate (20%) for the 79-1

cohort is comparable to the full six-year figure for the 76-1 cohort (21%).

-213.

Data for Hispanic students (Table 25) show a similar pattern of decline in

re-enrollment and graduation rates with a slight recovery. "Other" ethnic

data (Table 26) are left for the reader to examine.

Tables 27 through 30 present data for the Medical Center Campus.

Since these data are on full-time first-time-in-college students, the number

of students fitting this definition at Medical Center Campus is very small.

The figures are thus quite erratic and the reader is cautioned that conclusions

for this campus are speculative at best. Note, for example, the Winter 3

re-enrollment rate for the 77-1 cohort (Table 27) drops to 16% but then in-

creases to 21% for Fall 4. With only 73 students in the cohort, small changes

have a decided impact on the data. The high graduation rates for the 77-1

cohort are remarkable with almost 60% of this group graduating by Fall 6.

Stable figures should be generated in subsequent terms by the 80-1 and 81-1

ail-lofts where the number of students is at least over 100. The ethnic data

in Tables 28 through 30 are presented for the reader's information and are

not discussed here. The number of students in each cohort when subcategorized

by ethnic is too small for reasonable inferences from the data.

32

22 -

Table 12

North Campus

Enrollment and Cumulative Graduation Rate per 100 Full-Time First-time-in-College Students

Closing Fall Terms

Total All Ethnic

76-1 77.1 78.1 79.1 80-1 81 -1

Consecutive (N= 2,227) (N= 2,227) (N:'2,023) (N= 1,926) (N= 1,865) (N: 1,658)Major


Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 83 83 81 83 84 82

Fall 2 64 2 .61 1 62 1 63 7 64 1 62 1

Winter 2 60 8 55 6 54 6 56 12 57 4R)W

Fall 3 32 23 32 18 32 18 35 21 38 18

Winter 3 26 27 25 22 25 23 28 28

Fall 4 13 32 14 28 14 29 16 34

Winter 4 12 33 12 29 12 31

Fall 5 8 35 8 31 9 32

Winter 5 6 35 7 32

Fall 6 6 36 5 33

Winter 6 4 36

Data Source: Longitudinal Master File, SAS Analysis,

3334

Table 13

North Campus

Enrollment and' Cumulative Graduation Rate per 100 Full-Time First-time-in-CollegeStudents

Closing Fall Terms

White Non-Hispanic

Consecutive

Major


76-1

(N= 948 )

77-1 78-1

(N: 843 ) (N: 745 )

79-1 80-1 81-1

(N: 659 ) (N: 475 ) (N: 366 )

Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 82 83 76 80 78 80

Fall 2 59 2 61 2 58 57 8 57 1 63' 1

Winter 2 53 9 51 8 49 8 49 14 48 6

Fall 3 26 30 26 22 26 19 26 25 30 20

Winter 3 19 33 18 27 18 23 18 31

Fall 4 10 37 10 32 10 28 10 34

Winter 4 9 37 8 33 9 30

Fall 5 6 39 6 34 7 31

Winter 5 5 39 4 35'

Fall 6 3 40 4 36

Winter 6 3 40


3530

Table 14

North Campus

Enrollment and CumUlative Graduation Rate per 100 Full-TimeFirst-time-in-College Students

Closing Fall Terms

Black Non-Hispanic

76-1 77-1 78-1Consecutive (N= 618 ) (N= 683 ) (N= 538 ) (N: 504 ) (N: 517 ) (Nr. 405 )Major


79-1 80-1 81-1

Fall 1100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 80 80 78 81 84 79

Fall 2 59 50 1 52 59 4 62 53

Winter 2 58 3 46 3 43 2 54 7 55 2N

Fall 3 31 14 27 11 28 10 31 15 33 11

Winter 3 27 18 21 14 23 13 28 21

Fall 4

Winter 4

Fall 5

Winter 5

Fall 6

Winter 6

12 22 12 18 11 18 13 26

12 23 10 19 11 18

9 24 7 21 8 20

6 25 7 21

6 26 3 22

6 26


37

Table 15

North Campus



Hispanic'

76-1

Consecutive (N= 621 )

Major


77-1

(N: 669 )

78-1

(N.: 691 )

79-1 80-1

(10 732 ) (N: 844 )

81-1

(N.= 858 )

Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 90 BR. 88 88 87 84

Fall 2 80 2 72 75 1 71 8 70 1 66 1

' Winter 2 75 10 67 4 67 7 64 12 64 4NON

Fall 3 45 30 46 18 43 23 46 21 45 21

Winter 3 37 35 37 24 34 31 36 30

Fall 4

Winter 4

Fall 5

Winter 5

Fall 6

Winter 6

20 42 22 32 19 38 24 37

17 44 18 34 15 41

11 47 13 38 11 43 .

8 48 12 39

9 48 9 41

6 50


39

Table 16

North CaMpus


Closing Fall Terms

Other Ethnic

,IV

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1 80-1 81-1Consecutive (N= 40) (N= 32) (N: 49) (N= 31 ) (N= 29) (N= 29 )Major


Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 63 2 84 82 90 86

100

69

Fall 2 33 8 78 3 55 2 74 16 79 3 59 3

Winter 2 25 8 47 6 53 6 65 19 59 7N

Fall 3 13 13 31 28 27 18 48 32 38 21

Winter 3 13 13 22 31 29 24 32 42

Fall 4 3 18 6 31 18 33 10 45

Winter 4 3 20 9 34 18 35

Fall 5 0 20 6 34 4 35

Winter 5 0 20 9 34

Fall 6 0 23 13 38

Winter 6 0 23

Data Source:Longitudinal Master File, SAS'AnOsis,

424i

Table 17

South Campus


Closing Fall Terms

Total All Ethnic

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1 80-1 81-1Consecutive (N= 2,017) (N= 2,093) (N= 2,221) (N= 2,263) (N= 2,353) (N: 2,363)Major


Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 84 85 84 84 87 87

Fall 2 66 2 65 2 64 2 65 8 69 1 71

Winter 2 60 8 59 6 57 6 58 12 63 6

Fall 3 35 24 33 23 32 23 35 24 38 27

Winter 3 26 28 26 28 25 27 26 30

Fall 4 13 35 14 33 14 33 15 36

Winter 4 11 36 12 35 12 34

Fall 5 7 37 7 37 10 36

Winter 5 6 38 6 38

Fall 6 5 39 6 38

Winter 6 5 39


43

Table 18

South Campus


Closing Fall Terms

White Non-Hispanic

76-1 17 -1 78-179-1 80-1 81-1

Consecutive (N= 1,081) (P1- 1,116) (N: 1,059) (N= 1,038) (N: 886 ) (N: 834 )Major


Fall 1

Winter 1

Fall 2

Winter 2NtD

Fall 3

Winter 3

100 100

84 84

61 2 60 1

55 9 53 6

28 25 29 24

21 27 22 29

100 100 100 100

81 82 82 84

58 2 59 7 60 1 65 1

51 6 54 11 54 6

27 21 29 24 31 25

19 25 20 29

Fall 4

Winter 4

Fall 5

Winter 5

Fall 6

Winter 6

12 33 12 33 11 30 12 34

9 .34 10 35 9 31

6 35 6 37 8 32

4 36 5 37

4 37 4 38

4 37


45 46

de.

Table 19

South Campus



Black Non-Hispanic

76-1

Consecutive (N= 198 )

Major


77-1 78-1 79-1 80-1 81-1(N =199 ) (N =187 ) (N =137 ) (N: 136 ) (N =108 )

Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 73 72 74 74 88 87

Fall 2riJJ 1 47 45 47 5 64 1 69 3

Winter 2 54 4 42 2 42 2 39 7 57 40

Fall 3 28 10 19 8 22 14 20 18 37 21

Winter 3 21 13 16 10 17 '16 15 21

Fall 4

Winter 4

Fall 5

Winter 5

Fall 6

Winter 6

6 18 9 15 10 19 7 23

7 19 8 15 6 21

5 19 4 15 5 23

4 20 2 16

2 20 5 16

4 20


47.

w

Fall 3 49 27 42 26 40 26 43 24 42 28

Table 20

South Campus

Enrollment,and Cumulative Graduation Rate per 100 Full-Time First-time-in-CollegeStudents

Closing Fall Terms

Hispanic

76-1 77 -1. 78-1 79-1 80-1 81-1Consecutive (N:678 ) (N= 723 ) (N= 907 ) (N= 1,035) (N= 1,271) (N: 1,371)Major

Terms Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad .

Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 89 91 90 88 90 89

Fall 2 80 3 76 2 74 3 73 8 76 75 1

Winter 272 9 72 8 67 8 65 13 70 6

Winter 3 37 35 35 32 33 31 34 31

Fall 4

Winter 4

Fall 5

Winter 5

Fall 6

Winter 6

18 43 20 38 20 38 19 39

15 44 16 40 17 40

10 47 11 43 13 43

9 48 9 44

8 49) 10 46

7 50

Data Source: Longitudinal Master File; SAS Analysis

4J5U

Table 21

South Campus


Closing Fall Terms

Other Ethnic

76-1 77-1

Consecutive (N= 60 ) (N: 55 )

Major


78-1

(N= 68 )

79-1 80-1 81-1(N= 53 ) (N= 60 ) (N= 50 )

Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100 '---

Winter 1 77 84 78 85 88 86

Fall 2 47 3 69 4 71 1 62. 15 75 64 2

0.) Winter 2 45 10 60 11 62 6 57 15 75 6N

I'Fall 3 30 18 24 25 40 25 'i:4 36 50 43

Winter 3 20 18 20 27 32 31 Z5 40

Fall 4 13 27 15 33 13 40 9 43

Winter 4 7 28 9 33 15 43

Fall 5 0 28 4 36 6 44

Winter 5 0 28 0 36

Fall 6 0 28 4 36

Winter 6 3 28


51

Table 22


Enrollmentiand Cumulative Graduation Rate per 100 Full-TimeFirst-time-in-College Students

Closing Fall Terms

Total All Ethnic

76-1

Consecutive (P 860 )

Major


77-1

(N= 1,068)

78-179-1.

(N= 1,027)(N= 925 ) 8(N= 13-1 8,37 P0) (81-1862 )

Fall 1 100 100 100

Winter 1 78 1 76 71 70

Fall 2 54 2 43 3 46 5 42

Winter 2 51 7 38 5 39. 7 37

Fall 3 29 16 21 12 22 14 24

Winter 3 23 19 17 13 19 17 21 19

100 100

73

42 43

37

22 8

100

76

Fall 4 13 23 9 16 11 20 12 22

Winter 4 11 25 8 16 10 21

Fall 5 6 25 5 18 6 23

Winter 5 6 26 6 18

Fall 6 5 26 6 19

Winter 6 4 27


5354

Table 23


Enrollment and CumulatvieGraduation Rate per 100 Full-Time


White Non-Hispanic

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1 , 80-1 81-1Consecutive (N= 147 ) (N= 105 ) (N= 174 ) (N= 131 ) (N= 94 ) (N= 73 )Major


Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 70 1 68 69 66 77 1 73

Fall 2 47 1 42 3 40 4 42 7 50 2 17

Winter 2 42 9 33 8 35 5 37 9 44- 10

I Fall 3 14 20 12 23 15 18 23 18 19 24

Winter 3 11 22 8 24 13 20 18 18

Fall 4 5 26 4 25 4 22 11 23

Winter 4 3 26 2 25 3 23

Fall 5 3 26 5 25 4 23

Winter 5 3 26 0 25

Fall 6 3 27 3 25

Winter 6 4 27


55

Ui

Table 24



Closing Fall Terms

Black Non-Hispanic

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1 80-1 81-1Consecutive (N= 310 ) (N= 388 ) (N= 305 ) (N= 203 ) (N= 163 ) (P. 126 )Major


Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 80 73 65 13 6675

Fall 2 51 1 37 1 33 2 46 4 . 36 40 1

Winter 2 50 4 32 2 31 3 41 7 30 1

Fall 3 28 12 18 5 22 7 23 9 15 4

Winter 3 22 14 12 6 14 9 20 18

Fall 4 11 18 7 7 6 11 6 20

Winter 4 11 19 7 8 8 12

Fall 5 6 19 4 8 4 13

Winter 55 20 7 8

Fall 6 4 20 5 10

Winter 6 3 21

DIta Source: Longitudinal Master File, SAS Analysis.

5? 58

Table 25




Hispanic

76-1 77.1 78-1 79-1 80-1 81-1Consecutive (N= 3el ) (N= 570 ) (N= 535 ) (N= 577 ) (N= 1,099) (N= 657 )Major


Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 81 79 76 69 73 78

Fall 2 62 4 47 5 56 7 40 12 42 43

Winter 2 59 9 42 6 45 10 35 14 37 1

Fall 3 36 19 24 14 25 17 24 17 23 7

Winter 3 30 24 22 16 23 20 22 19

Fall 4 18 28 12 19 16 24 14 22

Winter 4 15 30. 10 20 14 26

Fall 5 8 31 6 22 8 28

Winter 5 7 32 6 22

Fall 6 6 33 6 .23

Winter 6 6 33

(1 .


Table 26



Closing Fall Terms

Other Ethnic

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1 80-1 81-1Consecutive (N= 22) (N= 5 ) (Nz 13 ) (ft:- 14 ) (V 14 ) (NI' 6 )Major


Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 64 80 62 71 86 17

Fall 2 14 60 54 71 7 71 33

u.1 Winter 2 9 60 46 64 7 64 7

' Fall 35 5 40 40 31 23 36 21 36 36

Winter 3 5 5 20 40 23 23 29 29

Fall 4 0 5 0 40 23 31 7 29

Winter 40 5 20 40 23 38

Fall 5 0 5 0 60 0 38

Winter 50 5 0 60

Fall 6

Winter 6

0 5 0 60

0 5


Table 27




Total All Ethnic

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1 80-1 81-1Consecutive (N= 133 ) (Nt 73 ) (N= 34) (N= 91 ) (N= 131 ) (N= 123 )Major

Terms Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad 'Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad

Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 77 82 76 80 81 67

Fall 2 61 3 64 7 65 3 59 8 56 54 1

Winter 2 64 7 62 21 56 12 56 13 53 8

Fall 3 32 27 30 45 24 29 36 21 37 19

Winter 3 29 30 16 47 21 32 30 27

Fall 4 17 30 21 51 6 32 20 33

Winter 4 15 35 16 53 6 41

Fall 5 10 38 11 58 3 41

Winter 5 7 39 5 58

Fall 6 7 41 10 69

Winter 6 5 41


Table 28



Closing Fall Terms

White Non-Hispanic

76-1 77.1 78-1 79-1 80-1 81-1

Consecutive (N= 60 ) (N= '29 ) (11= 14 ) (N= 32) (N: 39 ) (N: 32 )Major

Terms Enrolled Grad Emlled Grad Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad Enrolled Grad

Fall 1 100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 73 2 79 64 81 79 47

Fall 2 55 5 66 3 57 7 59 6 56 41

Winter 2 55 12 66 14 57 14 56 22 46 18

Fall 3 22 40 31 38 21 43 28 34 23 31

Winter 3 18 42 28 41 7 43 31 34

Fall 4 15 43 17 45 7 43 19 41

Winter 4 12 47 17 52 7 50

Fall 5 8 50 7 52 0 50

Winter 5 2 50 3 52

Fall 6 5 50 3 52

Winter 6 3 50


66

Table 29



Closing Fall Terms

Black Non-Hispanic

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1. 80-1 81-1

Consecutive (N= 38) (N: 23) (N= 7 ) (N= 27 ) (N= 40) (N= 42 )

Major


Fall 1100 100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 76 83 86 70 85 79

Fall 2 50 3 61 17 71 56 4 43 60

Winter 2 63 3 52 22 43 14 48 4 38

oFall 3 29 5 26 57 -29 14 33 11 18 10

Winter 3 26 8 4 57 29 29 22 15

Fall 4 18 8 17 61 0 29 22 22

Winter 4 18 13 9 61 0 29

Fall 5 11 16 17 65 0 29

Winter 5 13 18 9 65

Fall 6 8 21 9 70

Winter 6 3 21

Source: longitudinal Master File, SAS Analysis.

Table 30



Closing Fall Terms

Hispanic

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1 80-1 81-1

Consecutive (N= .35 ) (N= 21 ) (N= 13 ) (N= 30 ) (N= 52 ) (N= 48 )

Major


Fall 1100 100 100 100 100

Winter 1 G6 86 85 90 79 73

Fall 2 83 67 69 63 13 67 58 4

4 Winter 2 80 3 67 29 62 7 63 13 71. 8

Fall 3 51 29 33 43 23 23 47 17 63 17

Winter 3 49 34 14 43 31 23 37 33

Fall 4 20 37 29 48 8 23 20 37

Winter 4 17 40 24 48 8 38

Fall 5 11 40 10 57 8 38

Winter 5 9 43 5 57

Fall 6 9 46 19 57

Winter 6 9 46


6J70

Summary

Figures 1 through 3 present summary data on the cohort analyses.

For summary purposes, the three-year re-enrollment and graduation rates

(Winter 3) were used and points were plotted for the four cohorts with enough

data to have reached Winter 3. Figure 1 shows the three-year re-enrollment

rates by ethnic and by campus. Each separate graph represents a major ethnic

category while the last graph represents all ethnic groups combined. The

cohorts are listed at the bottom of each graph, ,and a separate line is drawn

for each campus. Medical Center Campus is excluded from this summary because

of the small number of full-time first-time students at that campus. .

For black non-Hispanics, the decrease in re-enrollment rate and

subsequent recovery in later cohorts is apparent in the figure. This is true

for each campus with the exception of South Campus where the three-year

re-enrollment rate for black non-Hispanics has declined for the 79-1 cohort..

Note also that North Campus has the highest re-enrollment rate for black

non-Hispanics.

For white non-Hispanics the re-enrollment rate is relatively stable

and shows little change from the interventions. New World Center

Campus is an exception and shows the more typical pattern of a decline in

re-enrollment rate for the 77-1 cohort and subsequent recovery over the next'

two cohorts.

Hispanic students show a decline in re-enrollment for 77-1 with the

advent of the interventions and fairly steady state re-enrollment from that

point on. The re-enrollment rate for New World Center Campus is generally

- 42 -

lower than for the other campuses which is probably due to the many special

programs present at New World Center during these cohort years.

Figure 2 presents three-year graduation rate;, oy ethnic and by campus.

For black non-Hispanics, notice the same pattern as was true with re-enrollment.

There was, a decline in graduation rate for the 77-1 cohort followed by a re-

covery for the next two cohorts. White non-Hispanic students show a slow re-

covery and their graduation rates have improved primarily for the 79-1 cohort.

New World Center Campus is an exception to these data, and the three-year

graduation rate for white non-Hispanics has not improved for the 79-1 cohort.

Graduation rates for Hispanic students show an initial decline for the 77-1

cohort followed by a recovery and fairly steady state for the following two

cohorts.

Figure 3 presents the combined graduation and re-enrollment data

by ethnic and by campus. For this Figure the graduation rate and re-enroll-

ment rate were summed to give the percent of students who were either still in

the system or who had successfully completed a degree. For this Figure each

cohort is shown on a separate graph with the campuses listed at the bottom of

each graph. The individual lines_represent ethnic groups. The data are dis-

played in this manner to facilitate visual comparison from one cohort to the

next. A line is drawn at the 50% graduation plus re-enrollment rate point to

aid the reader in noticing changes from one cohort to the next. Notice that

the graduation plus re-enrollment rate shows a decline from the 76-1 cohort

to the 77-1 cohort. This is especially true for black non-Hispanics and for

Hispanic students at the New World Center Campus. The 78-1 cohort is already

7243

showing signs of recovery. Notice that the black non-Hispanic rates have moved

closer to the other ethnic categories. For the 79-1 cohort the recovery in

graduation plus re-enrollment rate is visually apparent. These data look quite

similar to the 76-1 cohort. The rates for black non-Hispanics, however, are

even slightly higher than the 76-1 cohort rates on most campuses. Note also

that the North Campus shows the highest re-enrollment plus graduation rates

for the major ethnic categories.

In summary, the SOAP interventions began in 78-1 and had their initial

impact on the 77-1 cohort during its third year. Students in the 78-1 and

79-1 cohorts were under the SOAP policies for their entire enrollment. By

79-1, three-year graduation and re-enrollment rates had recovered and were

at or above the rates shown by the 76-1 cohort. These are the first longitu-

dinal data that clearly show the results of the interventions begun by the

College.

73

-44-

Figure 1

Three-Year Re-enrollment Rates by Ethnic and by Campus

60

50

40

30

20

10

Black Non-Hispanic White Non-Hispanic

60

zo_

10,_

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1

Cohorts

Hispanic

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1

Cohorts

North Campus ----oSouth Campus 01----0

4-1

40

1 30c4

u 20

10

50

60

50r-ir-i0

'1'40a)c4

g3o

20

10

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1

Cohorts

Total All Ethnic

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1

'Cohorts

New World Center CampusCollege-Wide

Figure 2

Three-Year Graduation Rates by Ethnic and by Campus

Black Non-Hispanic White Non-Hispanic60 60

50

40

30

20

10

60-

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1

Cohorts

Hispanic

50

40

30

20

10

60 -

50 - 50-

40 -

30

20-

10

1

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1

Cohorts

North CampusSouth Campus 0-0 -46-

40-

30 -

20-

10 -

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1

Cohorts

Total All Ethnic

76-1 77-1 78-1 79-1

Cohorts

New World Center Campus D----E1College-Wide

Figure 3

Three-Year Graduation + Re-enrollment Rate

76-1 Cohort

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

N S NWCCampus

CW

78-1 Cohort

S NWC CW

Campus

White Non - Hispanic co----c

Black Non-Hispanic

by Ethnic and by Campus

77-1 Cohort

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

S NWCCampus

79-1 Cohort

CW

S NWC CW

Campus

Hispanic a----onTotal All Ethnic -A

- 47

Questions for Further Research

It is clear from the data presented in this report that changes in

the patterns of retention and graduation rates across cohorts coincide with

academic reforms at Miami-Dade. Improved re-enrollment/graduation rates are

evident from the 78-1 cohort onward. It is not clear how these academic re-

forms relate to the changes.

The following questions remain unanswered:

1. Are students now self-selecting before applying to Miami-Dade so that

we are drawing an academically more able student than was true for the

76-1 and 77-1 cohorts?

2. While a "flush-out" effect was apparent for the 77-1 cohort when they

.came under the Standards (a drop in re-enrollment), the data suggest

that this is no longer the case. Re-enrollment rates have increased

for later cohorts. Does this reflect a combined "flush-out" of poor

students but increased retention of good students?

3. Is the shift of black non-Hispanic J's to a larger percentage of part-

timers one way of self-selecting out of the more rigorous standards?

4. Why have graduation rates increased? Are students simply graduating

sooner because of increased awareness of requirements (AGIS)? If so,

the increased graduation rates of the later cohorts reflect earlier

graduation and the trends may not continue through the full six-year

span. Are students graduating at a higher rate per se because of better

direction/advisement? If So, the rates for the later cohorts at the

end of a full six-year span should far surpass the earlier cohorts.

48 -77

Some of these questions will be addressed in future studies, but

some (Question 1, for example) will remain unanswered. The reader is cautioned

to consider these questions when discussing the results of this report as re-

lated to Miami-Dade's academic reforms.

ERIC Clearinghouse for Junior Colleges

8118 Math-Sciences BuildingUniversity of CaliforniaLos Angeles, California 90024

!DEC 2 1983

78

-49-

document resume ed 235 859 jc 830 481 · document resume ed 235 859 jc 830 481 author morris, cathy...

Documents